H. M. Advocate v A. E
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 31 March 1937 |
| Date | 31 March 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 13. |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
HIGH COURT.
Lord Justice-Clerk.
Procedure—Indictment—Time—Exceptional latitude—Charges of a course of incestuous conduct extending over years—No statement of definite dates.
Evidence in Criminal cases—Sufficiency—Corroboration—Panel charged with incest with two daughters—Whether evidence of one corroboration of evidence of other.
A panel was charged on an indictment which set forth (1) that on various occasions between 1st April 1927 and 5th July 1933 in his dwelling-house at X, and between 28th November 1933 and 14th January 1937 in his dwelling-house at Y, he did have incestuous intercourse with his daughter J., and (2) that on various occasions between 1st February 1931 and 5th July 1933 in said house at X, and between 28th November 1933 and 3rd June 1936 in said house at Y, he did have incestuous intercourse with his daughter E. At the dates when the alleged improper conduct respectively began the girls were aged 8 and 10 years.
Held by the Lord Justice-Clerk (Aitchison) (1) that the indictment was not irrelevant for lack of specification notwithstanding the exceptional latitude of time taken by the Crown, when regard was had to the ages of the children when the alleged criminal conduct began and to the fact that the Crown proposed to prove a course of criminal conduct extending over years and not merely isolated instances of such conduct; and (2) (the case having gone to trial) that, if the jury believed the evidence of the two girls, they could take the one as corroborating the other, and, therefore, as competent evidence against the panel on each charge.
A. E. was charged on an indictment at the instance of His Majesty's Advocate which set forth that "(1) (a) on various occasions between 1st April 1927 and 5th July 1933, in the dwelling-house then occupied by you at X, (b) on various occasions between 28th November 1933 and 14th January 1937, in the dwelling-house occupied by you at Y, and (c) on one occasion between 1st and 31st January 1935, the particular date being to the prosecutor unknown, in the dwelling-house occupied by C. G., at Z, you did have incestuous intercourse with J., now aged seventeen years, your lawful daughter, who between said 1st April 1927 and said 5th July 1933 resided with you at said dwelling-house at X, and between said 28th November 1933 and said 14th January 1937 resided with you at said dwelling-house at Y, and who is presently residing at [a certain address], contrary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ogg v H. M. Advocate
...during the course of seven years, the particular dates of these occasions being unknown and unspecified. H. M. Advocate v. A. E., 1937 J. C. 96,distinguished. Evidence in criminal cases—Sufficiency—Corroboration—Panel charged with a series of sexual offences—Direct evidence of one witness o......
-
R v Kilbourne
...of logic and commonsense are common to both. We were referred to the cases of Moorov [1930] J.C. 68 (an indecent assault case); A.E. [1937] J.C. 96 (an incest case) and Ogg [1938] J.C. 152, (a case of indecent conduct with male persons). 28I quote from these cases at length because they a......
- R v Boardman
-
Reza v General Medical Council
... ... 953F ) ... The following cases are referred to in the judgment of their Lordships: ... Advocate, H.M. v. A.E., 1937 J.C. 96 ... Advocate, H.M. v. M'Donald, 1928 J.C. 42 ... Daly v. General Medical Council [ 1952 ] 2 All E.R. 666 , P.C ... Duncan v. Medical Practitioners Disciplinary Committee [ 1986 ] 1 N.Z.L.R. 513 ... Lanford v. General Medical Council ... ...